‘We act against officials at all levels, not just lower ranks’
Srinagar, Mar 14: Director, Jammu and Kashmir Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) Shakti Kumar Pathak has said that corruption continues to remain one of the biggest challenges to governance in Jammu and Kashmir, but asserted that increasing public complaints indicate rising trust in anti-corruption institutions.
He said the bureau is committed to acting on credible complaints against corrupt officials at any level, stressing that public cooperation is crucial in tackling corruption across Jammu and Kashmir.
Speaking in an interview podcast, Director Pathak, as reported by the news agency—Kashmir News Observer (KNO), said the fight against corruption cannot be carried out by investigative agencies alone and requires active participation from citizens.
“Corruption cannot be the responsibility of one agency alone. It is the duty of the public as well. Until people decide that they do not want to be involved in corruption, the problem will continue,” he said.
Pathak said the growing number of complaints received by the ACB reflects greater confidence among citizens that their grievances will be addressed. “Normally, people approach us when they feel the situation has crossed the line. The increase in complaints is actually a positive sign that people believe action is being taken,” he said.
Post-2019 framework strengthened anti-corruption system
The ACB Director said the anti-corruption system in the region has strengthened following the 2019 reorganisation of J&K, as the vigilance framework is now aligned with national laws and institutions.
He said the bureau now operates under the national vigilance structure linked with the Central Vigilance Commission, making the legal framework comparable to the rest of the country. “In that way, the anti-corruption law applicable across India is now applicable here as well,” he said.
Awareness drives to encourage complaints
Pathak said the ACB has also increased public outreach programmes to make citizens aware of complaint mechanisms and the role of vigilance institutions.
He said the bureau organised several programmes during Vigilance Awareness Week, held around the birth anniversary of Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel on October 31, with the theme “Vigilance is Shared Responsibility”.
According to him, the bureau reached nearly 50,000 people during these campaigns to explain how citizens can file complaints and how corruption cases are investigated.
ACB not biased against lower-rank officials
Responding to criticism that the ACB acts more aggressively against lower-rank officials while remaining passive against bureaucrats or politicians, Pathak said the perception is incorrect.
He explained that most trap cases involve lower-rank officials because they are typically the ones dealing directly with cash transactions.
“The officers who deal directly with cash and smaller payments are usually at the lower level. That is why trap cases are more visible at that level,” he said.
However, he clarified that the ACB is ready to act against higher authorities if a complainant comes forward. “If someone dares to come to us with a complaint against a higher official, we will definitely lay a trap. But such traps require a complainant who is willing to cooperate with us,” he said.
Verification before trap operations
Pathak said the bureau follows a strict verification process before initiating trap operations to ensure complaints are genuine and not motivated.
He said a separate team conducts secret verification of both the complainant and the accused official before proceeding further. “We verify the entire record of the complainant as well as the person against whom the complaint is made. Only when we are satisfied that the demand is genuine do we proceed with a trap,” he said.
According to him, the team conducting verification is different from the team that eventually carries out the trap operation, ensuring impartiality in the process.
Safeguards against false complaints
The ACB Director acknowledged that false or malicious complaints do occur and said the bureau has mechanisms to prevent innocent officials from being framed. He said anonymous and pseudonymous complaints are generally not entertained in accordance with government guidelines.
However, Pathak added that in rare cases where allegations appear credible and involve officials with questionable reputations, the bureau may conduct limited verification.
He said legal provisions also exist to take action against those who file false complaints, referring to relevant sections of criminal law dealing with false information. “Our responsibility is not only to catch corrupt officials but also to ensure that honest officers are not wrongly implicated,” he said.
Recruitment and governance processes
On allegations surrounding recruitment irregularities, including issues related to the Fire and Emergency Services recruitment case, Pathak said that most government systems are designed properly, but sometimes fail during implementation.
“Rules and processes are designed carefully by experts. Problems arise when individuals try to exploit loopholes or manipulate the system,” he said.
He added that investigations are initiated whenever credible complaints are received.
J&K Bank scam under investigation
When asked about the alleged large-scale scam involving Jammu and Kashmir Bank, the Director ACB said the case remains under investigation, and the agency is progressing with the probe.
“Investigation is a long process. Evidence has to be collected, documents examined and links between the accused established. It cannot be concluded in just a few days after registering an FIR,” he said.
He said people often expect immediate results once an FIR is registered, but corruption investigations require careful evidence collection and legal scrutiny.
Viral trap videos not released by ACB
Pathak addressed concerns about videos of trap cases going viral on social media. He said the ACB does not release such videos and ensures that operations are conducted discreetly. “Our effort is always to secure the area where the trap is conducted so that media or others do not interfere with the proceedings,” he said.
However, he added that when operations take place in public spaces, bystanders or media may capture visuals which later circulate on social media.
At the same time, he said officials involved in corruption should also consider the consequences of their actions on their families and reputation.
Action after trap cases
According to Pathak, officials caught in trap cases are arrested and suspended in accordance with legal provisions.
He said departmental inquiries are also conducted simultaneously. However, he acknowledged that the lengthy legal process sometimes results in accused employees being reassigned to different posts while the trial continues. “After suspension and departmental inquiry, some employees may be assigned other duties as the court trial takes time,” he said.
Only 1–2% complaints lead to FIRs
Explaining the complaint-handling system of the bureau, Pathak said only a small percentage of complaints eventually lead to criminal cases.
He said the ACB receives a large number of complaints relating to development works, administrative issues and alleged irregularities in government departments.
Many of these complaints are first examined by departmental vigilance officers (DVOs), who review the matter within their departments.
“If the issue is within the department’s capacity to resolve, it is handled there. If it involves serious legal or corruption aspects beyond their jurisdiction, it is referred back to the ACB,” he said.
Joint surprise checks and verifications
The Director said the bureau also conducts Joint Surprise Checks (JSCs) in cases involving allegations such as substandard construction or misuse of public funds.
In such cases, ACB teams conduct inspections along with officials from the concerned department to examine records, verify documents and collect samples if necessary.
Based on the findings, the bureau decides whether the case warrants the registration of an FIR.
He said multiple layers of scrutiny, including preliminary verification, miscellaneous verification and open verification, are followed before initiating criminal proceedings.
“Only about one to two per cent of complaints ultimately result in FIR registration,” he said.
‘Public support essential to fight corruption’
Reiterating the need for citizen participation, the Director ACB said the fight against corruption will become stronger only when people actively refuse to participate in corrupt practices. “If citizens come forward with complaints and support investigations, corruption can be tackled more effectively,” he said. (KNO)
